Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Clinical Nutrition: nutraceutical, nutrigenomic, nutrigenetic, malnutrition, nutrition care process (NCP), therapeutic communication

Community Nutrition: malnutrition, assessment of nutritional status, food consumption patterns, food security and food safety, surveillance, development of communication, information, education

Food Science: food technology, food processing, food additives, local food, functional food, food product development, analysis of nutrient content, food additives

Food Service: hygiene and sanitation, food administration, food quality management, service management

Sport Nutrition: sport food, ergogenic aids, nutritional assessment of athletes, food managament of athletes


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Editorial Information

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Every article submitted to Ilmu Gizi Indonesia will receive a peer-review in a blind review by reviewers in accordance with their field of knowledge. The review period for each manuscript ranges from three to four weeks. The reviewers then make a decision regarding the eligibility of the manuscript. The results of the reviewer's decision have several possibilities, namely: rejected, major revision, minor revision, or accepted. Furthermore, the decision to accept or not the manuscript will be made at the editorial board meeting forum. Then, the decision is given to the author. Manuscripts with accepted and revised status will enter the next process until finally the manuscript is published.


Publication Frequency

Ilmu Gizi Indonesia is published twice a year, namely in August and February. The first issue starts from Vol.1 No. 1, namely August 2017. Each issue contains six until nine manuscripts so that in one year Indonesian Nutrition Sciences will publish 12 until 18 manuscripts.


Open Access Policy

Ilmu Gizi Indonesia is available in the form of open access (open journal system) to facilitate the dissemination of information on research results to ensure the development of science.



Ilmu Gizi Indonesia utilizes the LOCKSS system for filing systems More...


Screening for Plagiarisme

Manuscripts sent to Ilmu Gizi Indonesia will be checked for similarities using an application plagiarism detector. Starting from Volume 3 Number 2, Ilmu Gizi Indonesia uses an application iThenticate to check the similarity of the manuscripts.


Publication Ethics

Ilmu Gizi Indonesia is a peer-reviewed journal. Publication ethic including all aspects of publication ethics follows guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which advise editors, publishers, and researchers on expected practices regarding editing peer reviews.

Summary guidelines for peer review publication based on COPE (https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines/editing-peer-reviews) including:

1. Journals should have clear guidelines for reviewers on what is acceptable and unacceptable in a reviewer report regarding tone, language, and content.

2. The journal policy for whether and under what circumstances a review might be edited or suppressed should be clearly stated.

3. Ideally, any edits of the review should be the result of collaboration with the reviewer by giving them the opportunity to revise the report themselves to comply with the journal’s guidelines.

4. The editor should inform the reviewer of any significant edits made to their review if the reviewer was not involved in the editing process. Such edits should address only issues of tone, language, and deviations from journal policy and reviewer guidelines, and should not change the meaning or intention of the review, nor alter the reviewer’s professional opinion about the quality, content, or intellectual validity of the manuscript under review.

5. As an alternative to editing the review itself, the editor should provide guidance to the author on how to respond to a hostile or unprofessional review and reference the journal policy that precludes editing the reviews, if applicable. This guidance could be provided in editorial parenthetic comments within the review itself or in an editor’s decision letter.

These provisions can be explained in detail in the form of a publication ethics mechanism for authors, editors and reviewers :

For Author

  1. Author(s) affirm that the material has not been previously published and that they have not transferred elsewhere any rights to the article; also should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.
  2. Author(s) should not engage neither in plagiarism nor self-plagiarism, ensure the originality of article, also properly cited others’ work in accordance with the format of the references.
  3. Author(s) should ensure that they follow the authorship guidelines and criteria of Ilmu Gizi Indonesia.
  4. Author (s) should ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as corresponding author, author, and co-authors.
  5. The author(s) haven’t suggested any personal information that may make the identity of the patient recognizable in any forms of description part, photograph or pedigree.
  6. To prevent suspicions of data falsification or fabrication, author(s) should give the data and details to editor if needed.
  7. If at any point in time, the author(s) discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the error or inaccuracy must be reported to the editor.
  8. Authors of the journal should clarify everything that may cause a conflict of interests officially in the form of a statement letter into Ilmu Gizi Indonesia.  Author's statement can be downloaded here.


For Editors

  1. Editors should be responsible for every article published in Ilmu Gizi Indonesia.
  2. Editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript based on the review report of the editorial review board.
  3. Editors should be communicate with editorial team and reviewers in making the final decision.
  4. An editor has to evaluate the manuscript objectively for publication, judging each on its quality without looking to nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. He/she should decline his/her assignment when there is a potential for conflict of interest.
  5. In review processed, editors need to ensure the document which sent to the reviewer does not contain the information of the author and and conversely keeps the reviewer's identity secret from author (double blind review).
  6. Editors’ decision should be informed to authors accompanied by reviewers’ comments unless they contain offensive or libelous remarks.
  7. Editors and all staff should guarantee the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript.
  8. Editors will be guided by COPE flowcharts (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts) if there is a suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.



Reviewers need to comment on ethical questions and possible research and publication misconduct.

  1. Reviewers will do the work in a timely manner and should notify the editor if they can not complete the work.
  2. Reviewers need to keep the confidentiality of the manuscript.
  3. Reviewers should not accept to review the manuscripts in which there is a potential conflict of interest between them and any of the authors.